The government is assembling a panel of experts to look at introducing a law against taking drugs and driving, and to assess the means of testing and the possible legal limits for motorists.

The Department for Transport is setting up the panel of academics and scientists to advise on whether or not drug-driving rules could be implemented in the same way as the UK's drink-driving laws.

Legislation could be introduced if the panel decides it is technically feasible, in terms of roadside testing and of establishing a universal level for either illicit or medicinal drugs.

Safety campaigners point to a large increase in the proportion of fatal accidents involving drug use, foremost being cannabis, since the 1980s.

The road safety minister, Mike Penning, said: "Britain has some of the safest roads in the world but we know how important it is to tackle the menace of drug-driving. That is why we are putting together experts to give us advice on the technical aspects of introducing an offence of driving with an illegal drug in your body."

While motorists can be charged with being unfit to drive through drugs, the difficulty of securing proof means prosecutions are comparatively rare.

Under current law, evidence is needed of driving ability being impaired. With no roadside test kit, similar to a breathalyser, assessment relies on the subjective view of police doing impairment tests: drivers count to 30, walk in a straight line nine paces forward and back, and touch finger to nose with eyes closed.

The panel, which will meet in the spring, will consider if it is possible to set drug equivalents to the drink-drive blood alcohol level. The DfT lists cocaine, MDMA, cannabis and opiates as the main drugs for consideration, but prescription and legally obtained drugs can also affect driving ability, especially in combination.

Roadside drug testing kits, or "drugalysers", are already used in Australia, where the state of Victoria pioneered drug-drive testing in 2004. Using saliva tests, police can, in five minutes, test for MDMA, methamphetamine (found in speed and crystal meth) and THC, the active component in cannabis.

Political and legal questions need to be addressed, however.

Andrew Howard, head of road safety at the AA, said: "The big question is – how can you talk about an acceptable level of something that's illegal to possess? If it's zero, then you have a law that's about the use of a substance and not driving. Our members are definitely in favour of a law that affects you if you're impaired, and 75% want it to be zero tolerance."

Steve Rolles, of the drug policy foundation Transform, said: "Clearly anything that impairs road safety is a legitimate concern. Blood alcohol is a good test, but cannabis testing doesn't do that. You can have a positive test a month later in the bloodstream but you're only impaired for a day. So there's a danger you are going to criminalise drug use by default."

The move follows a recommendation in a 2010 review of drink and drug driving law by the legal expert Sir Peter North – although his proposals to cut the drink-driving limit were rejected by the previous transport secretary, Philip Hammond.

The figures North examined showed that drugs were a contributory factor in 2008 for 56 fatal road accidents; for 2010 the figure was 39. However, many drivers are convicted for alcohol alone when drugs are present – and a large proportion of drug-drivers have also had alcohol.

Stephen Glaister, director of the RAC Foundation, said: "There is no doubt that drug-driving is a very big and growing problem, particularly when combined with drink. Reliable screening devices are being developed and it is hoped approved equipment will soon provide legally acceptable proof of drug-driving.

"The RAC Foundation believes there is also a strong case for a law which sees motorists detected driving with illegal drugs in their system penalised, without impairment itself having to be proved."

He said official statistics showed more than 1,000 accident casualties yearly were due to drugs and that this was "thought to be an under-estimate".

However, Rolles said: "Not all drugs impair. As the government says, tiredness kills on the roads."